Comment 41 for bug 493156

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 5:20 AM, Balbir Singh <email address hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Christian Kujau
> <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Whooha, language!
>>
>> And I think they "fixed" it, albeit in a weird way:
>> CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT is enabled in the kernel config, but the feature
>> is still disabled unless the kernel is booted with "delayacct" as a boot
>> parameter, see my comment above.
>>
>
> I am not sure who made the decision and on what data, but
> TASK_DELAY_ACCT should be the least of the problems when it comes to
> overheads.
>
> The correct path IMHO is to show us the overhead and lets fix it if it
> is unacceptable
>
Decision was totally right. One should NOT change behavior of kernel
in the middle of LTS lifecycle (e.g. like it was done to
CONFIG_NET_NS). Of cause it seems kinda strange that CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS
is set to "y" and we are talking about CONFIG_TASK_DELAY_ACCT
overhead.

And yes, at least some numbers would be nice (esp. form Nicholas
Janssen (xnicholas) who says that there is no overhead on his
workload).